well one cannot blame the brazilians for a more austere monitoring mode version - the worst threat is airborne smugglers and drug planes there. argentina, uruguay, chile, paraguay are 180' opposite from the sino-pak combo as neighbours.

our kid may be small but has to be a real hard boiled egg, a guy with chip on shoulder.

It woud be interesting to see, which aircraft is used for follow on larger AEWs. If heavier aircraft with similar configuration (using engines near the tail) is to be used then Gulfstream comes to mind. Though if it possible to use E-190s then the Emb JV can be carried forward.

I think both Gulfstream and Emb have made airframes for AEWs, what about Bombardier? Some other interesting featuers of Gulfstream are small size (even with long range/heavy MTOW), higher speed, higher flight ceiling etc. Gulfstream/Bombds build for VIP travel translates better into AEWs compared to passenger aircraft which suffer with bigger cabin size, which is not requried in AEWs beyond a point.

in that case some of the bombardier global 7000/8000, gulfstream 550/650 and dassault falcon900 fit the bill.all of them have high speed, 13000km of range and can carry around 10 passengers in executive seating. in contrast the smaller passenger oriented jets seldom have more than 4000km of range because they dont need to fly non-stop across such long trans oceanic routes.

Folks sorry to ask this question here, but why cant a concentric radar be put on an airframe. That will provide 360deg capability and also provide better information from below the aircraft. I am not sure if concentric conveys the meaning but i mean something like a thick band around the airframe to house the Tx/Rx modules and a TDM mechanism to process the inputs from each sector of these modules. An analogy of this design is a wrist and a wrist band, wrist here being the fuselage and wrist band being the housing for the radar elements

in that case some of the bombardier global 7000/8000, gulfstream 550/650 and dassault falcon900 fit the bill.all of them have high speed, 13000km of range and can carry around 10 passengers in executive seating. in contrast the smaller passenger oriented jets seldom have more than 4000km of range because they dont need to fly non-stop across such long trans oceanic routes.

All these planes have these lovely ranges with piddly payloads and space, cooling and power to cram decent electronics.

I agree the huge brochure ranges are with only 8 people and almost no luggage (being a biz jet)...it will decline hugely once mission eqpt is packed in. but the high ceiling might remain if anyone cares.

DRDO along with Embraer is one of the very few success stories (if proven in time ahead) where collaboration with like minded countries can do wonders. This is just a hairpin tip of the other "could be success" stories on other fields. We should tie up with Brazil on many many other things (defense or non-defense) too!!!!

in that case some of the bombardier global 7000/8000, gulfstream 550/650 and dassault falcon900 fit the bill.all of them have high speed, 13000km of range and can carry around 10 passengers in executive seating. in contrast the smaller passenger oriented jets seldom have more than 4000km of range because they dont need to fly non-stop across such long trans oceanic routes.

All these planes have these lovely ranges with piddly payloads and space, cooling and power to cram decent electronics.

You will need a reasonable sized platform to be somewhat effective.

CY,

Circumstances have forced India to miniaturize. Along with software, THAT is one of India's basic strengths.

There is a certain amount of risk involved. However, I would not put it past them.

if space and power is the req, then Boeing is offering a downgraded version of the P8I as a MRMP candidate. that would ensure logisitcal common tail across the fleet.sure it will be more expensive than the small cats but will have AMPLE room for future upgrades and payloads given these birds will fly 40 years in service.

I agree the huge brochure ranges are with only 8 people and almost no luggage (being a biz jet)...it will decline hugely once mission eqpt is packed in. but the high ceiling might remain if anyone cares.

Nah, really, these piddly toys work for those smaller countries with no active borders and NATO/Uncle to bail them out . But in a true war, where we have active enemies, only the thing with most fuel, secondary crew and rest area will do.

Circumstances have forced India to miniaturize. Along with software, THAT is one of India's basic strengths.

There is a certain amount of risk involved. However, I would not put it past them.

Miniaturization is only to a limit. With those small planes, you have to abort mission if something goes wrong. You cannot replace anything inflight. Again, you have tight working conditions and fatigue sets in more quickly.. These are t-72 of awacs.. small/cramped/non expandable and low range..

When you are going to be allocating escorts to AEW on every mission, you better spend the money and pay for a decent platform. The cost difference is like 50-100 million at most for the platform. Not worth quibbling over. Each escort costs us 100-150 Million dollars. WHen you protecting your high value assets, they might as well be high value.

Get a long range platform and add in secondary crew, extra toilets, food space and rest areas, refuelling pods. They need to stay in AIR for long times when conflict starts.

if space and power is the req, then Boeing is offering a downgraded version of the P8I as a MRMP candidate. that would ensure logisitcal common tail across the fleet.sure it will be more expensive than the small cats but will have AMPLE room for future upgrades and payloads given these birds will fly 40 years in service.

If we are getting P8I, we might as well get the full standard thingy and add in extra p8I controlled drones to patrol larger areas. No point in skimping. Will it really save us anything ? The operating cost is going to be same. Your cost difference over the life time will be like 10% (the missing instruments and a few crew members) less than that of a fully featured system.

Adding in drones will allow us to cut down the number of frames we need to patrol the waters. That option makes more sense. Let the coast guard use dornier based systems. Standardize on P8I all the way to 24 odd platforms with 50-60 drones for round the clock monitoring.

A Boeing 767 based platform similar to our P8i wouls be ideal, similarity with P8i is an advantage, the huge fleet of these birds in the civilian space is a plus, also we can get some consultsncy from Boeing in integrating the RADAR, maybe we can even buy couple of Wedgetails which Boeing has in reserve.

the choice is really between downlinking data to ground station or having the ample cargo hold of a 737 for onboard racks of processing eqpt and onboard control by upto 14 operator stns with associated business class seats, galley and sleeping bunks for extra mission crew and pilots.

time on station of 18-24 hr could be possible for a wedgetail or phalcon adequately staffed with crew.

The aim is to develop long-range radars with onboard command, control and communications for both tactical and air defence forces from higher altitudes, says the proposal sent on November 21.

I think that DRDO is starting with developing L Band Radars and would move onto selecting the platform subsequently. I think the present AEWs use "S" Band Radars (?). I was wondering if E-2D and P-3s can carry a chapati then why not MRTA, Boeing 737 or even Airbus 320??

Ideally,the "biscuit" slab style radar sytem used on the Emb.like the Swedish version its own Erieye,should be fitted/integrated into an aircraft being built in India-in the future.Flipping through the debate about EW and "CHAMP" (http://defense-update.com/20110922_boei ... issil.html) and other new HMP and exotic tech on the way, a larger aircraft with greater range and endurance,larger diameter fuselage may be needed to house extra eqpt.,consoles,crew,etc..Ideally,the twin-jet MTA could be the platform,as it is larger than the EMB and smaller than a Phalcon/IL-76 airframe.Being built at home would also make it cheaper and cost-effective to operate and would allow us to acquire greater numbers with the money saved.

Yes, MTA would make more sense than anything else in that range.. BUt we are not even inking documents or drinking chai biscoot and talking about MTA. it has taken back seat somewhere and it doesn't seem we are going anywhere with ruskies on that front.

Hopefully the designers will work on a long range version with extra fuel tanks from the get go...

well one cannot blame the brazilians for a more austere monitoring mode version - the worst threat is airborne smugglers and drug planes there. argentina, uruguay, chile, paraguay are 180' opposite from the sino-pak combo as neighbours.

our kid may be small but has to be a real hard boiled egg, a guy with chip on shoulder.

DRDO along with Embraer is one of the very few success stories (if proven in time ahead) where collaboration with like minded countries can do wonders. This is just a hairpin tip of the other "could be success" stories on other fields. We should tie up with Brazil on many many other things (defense or non-defense) too!!!!

I believe they are a significant player in the pharma, agricultural export and civilian nuclear industry side...money is not a problem for them, a smallish population, giant pool of natural resources, very little security threat except narco types, fast growth...if at all we need extra space to grow crops in the future on a commercial scale it is one place where land in amazonia is aplenty.

While this aircraft will now undergo a full certification process over the next two years, India will receive two more Embraer aircraft by the middle of next year to be integrated with the AEW&C System.

The Indian AESA radar is the primary sensor for the indigenous AEW & C. The radar can look 240 degrees within a short time and has a range of 350 km; it can track more than 500 targets simultaneously.

Quote:

The IFF system has been developed entirely by the CABS. Christopher said, “The IFF determines whether the target determined the primary radar is a friend or foe. The interrogator emits a message querying the target in a particular sector. Replies from the target are automatically associated with the primary radar detections. This information is then used by the AEW&C system to identify friendly and unfriendly aircraft in the area and deal with them appropriately.”

The Defence Acquisition Council has given approval for the indigenous development of 2,700 IFF systems and the Services want a single-box solution in the IFF system. The government has the option of buying the remaining 500 IFF systems in the global market.

well it depends what is the capability of the air to air mode they shoehorned in. even all commercial planes have a2a radar from firms like Bendix. I suspect these are for tracking large planes and weather cell avoidance only....the ability to spot high alt targets, low alt targets, fast movers and low RCS targets like CM/ASM/AAM running around might be quite low to nonexistent.

range is also likely to be very basic.

the KA31 radar will imo outrange and outperform it by a handy margin for airborne threats.

well it depends what is the capability of the air to air mode they shoehorned in. even all commercial planes have a2a radar from firms like Bendix. I suspect these are for tracking large planes and weather cell avoidance only....the ability to spot high alt targets, low alt targets, fast movers and low RCS targets like CM/ASM/AAM running around might be quite low to nonexistent.

range is also likely to be very basic.

the KA31 radar will imo outrange and outperform it by a handy margin for airborne threats.

so every indication is AEW needs a much bigger radar else the USN with its hordes of P3s would not bother with the cost and complexity of having 4 X E2 on every carrier.

So why has IN asked for Air to Air mode on APY -10 , any ideas?

And regarding USN E-2, their carriers operate from ranges far away from land bases and sometimes need to travel huge distances in a week or 2, so moving P-3's along with service personal and equipment to land base within range to cover the carrier may not be practical, so they can't rely on land based P3's and need carrier launched aircraft, so it may not be worth the additional cost for this role. Whereas the IN will find land based aircraft monitoring arial threats in Arabian sea and Bay of Bengal may be useful.

Regarding size of APY-10 radar I agree, unless part of the Radar is hidden withing the body of P-8.

A second requirement is for an air-to-air capability to exploit the aircraft’s typically high operating altitudes. “India is interested in the air picture from high altitude,” said Carey. “We’ve adapted the waveform to give that capability.” Details of the kind of air-to-air capability that can be achieved have not been revealed. Adapting the APY-10 for its extra duties has involved changes in the data- and signal-processors, and some alterations to the actual antenna. Mounted in the lower nose of the P-8, the radar has a forward scan over a 240-deg sector.

These developments have aroused interest among other potential customers. The P-8 is being marketed to a number of countries, and is one of the likely competitors for a forthcoming Singapore maritime patrol requirement.

from your link it does sound like air surveillance is there, albeit not at level of a proper CABS AEW type radar...would not have as much range and power.

LRMP-cum-AEW a/c operating alone ahead of the fleet might provide early warning of inbound strike planes letting the fleet remain radar passive and setup ambush along the threat axis using AAW DDGs of the P15A mould....thats how the E2's operate....

would this SAR/ISAR thing be useful to surveil land targets hiding below cover ? what is its use in ship target scanning? is this precision targeting + SAR thing for using weapons like the SLAM-ER on land targets

Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31Posts: 4612Location: The rings around Uranus.

Dennis wrote:

Found a document detailing the capability downgrading and modification of the APY-10 going into the P-8I.

Modify APY-10 Radar for Export to India- Modify Radar navigator to remove accumulated carrier phase and revert to earlier, less sophisticated navigatorThis appears to be precision GPS that provides input to the radar computer to provide greater accuracy utilizing timing of RF pulses as they return to radar receiver. The situation display operator may therefore have better background map information, and more importantly perhaps better clutter filtering.

- Remove Precision Targeting capabilityThis is probably referring to radar target detection capability and modifying radar software to properly use the sensors in place for this version of the P-8.

- Remove UHR ISAR capability- Remove 1 and 3 foot SAR capabilityBoth of these items are for limiting synthetic aperture radar capability. I find it amazing that Raytheon reveals that the P-8 radar for the USN is capable of 1 and 3 foot range gate capability, but of course they don't state the pulse repitition interval time and range.

- Limit performance to meet 30 meter SAR geo-location accuracyThis is means the radar is capable of 30 m range gate resolution, which is very good. For comparison civilian radar for ATC is capable of 100 m range gate resolution. Note I am not talking about target resolution. With a resolved 30 m range gate, the actual target pulse width is about 0.2 micro seconds which should provide good target resolution provided you can get at least several return pulses.

Add an Air-to-Air Target Detection / Tracking CapabilityAlthough this is limited by a 240 degree view, given the resolution of this radar, it's a good modification. I would probably bet its better than the Phalcon, but of course the P-8 doesn't have the radar range and full azimuthal and elevation coverage. Much will depend on the clutter filtering capability and software. Don't think for a minute Raytheon is going to give this away, not because it is India, but because this is their bread and butter. Even the USN is proababaly paying hundreds of dollars an hour for this type of support.

Found a document detailing the capability downgrading and modification of the APY-10 going into the P-8I.- Limit performance to meet 30 meter SAR geo-location accuracy

Mort Walker wrote:

This is means the radar is capable of 30 m range gate resolution, which is very good. For comparison civilian radar for ATC is capable of 100 m range gate resolution. Note I am not talking about target resolution. With a resolved 30 m range gate, the actual target pulse width is about 0.2 micro seconds which should provide good target resolution provided you can get at least several return pulses.

Joined: 31 May 2004 11:31Posts: 4612Location: The rings around Uranus.

^^^I think you're confusing the towed sonar with radar. What the USN version is capable of is periscope detection with the radar, hence the use of SAR & ISAR. A truly remarkable technical feat of hardware and software considering the radar processing can eliminate the clutter of the ocean surface given conditions.

The P-8I does appear to have a very good radar (from the pictures it looks like the transmitter is a TWT source), even watered down, and does explain why the IN is acquiring 12 P-8Is and is considering 12 more for a total of 24. The USN is planning on buying 117 P-8As and the USAF is going to use hundreds of P-8S versions for a replacement of the JSTARS. I would be very interested in the agreement the IN has with Raytheon, as the IN will be the first customer using the P-8 along with the USN. When the IN gets operational experience, Raytheon will definitely be interested, in return Raytheon should provide a radar and avionics development and logistics test suite for the IN. This is a very complicated platform for any military and the learning curve will be great. I wonder who proposed the Air to Air role of the P-8I? My bet it was Boeing and Raytheon as they have the developmental experience on this particular platform. Another interesting facet is that BEL has already delivered to Boeing the secure data link modules which indicates that Boeing has faith in the modules for system integration testing. This implies that the MMRCA could have easily been the F/A-18 and India could have taken delivery earlier - but that's a different topic for another thread.